All Posts by Mors.Magne

I reckon the underlying problem is that Hearthstone is the massive success that MTGO should have been, and now Wizards is under pressure and fighting for survival - doing everything it can.

The reason why I think that MTGO might be fighting for survival is that in order to continue as they are, the number of new players has to at least equal the number of people who no longer wish to play MTGO. Heathstone could totally mess that equation up for Wizards, which means they have to do something or lay people off etc.

Create the Character YOU want... to do the activity YOU don't want to do!

The character creation system has never been the problem. The problem is that the only 'career' is organised team ganking.

YOU want to explore solo????!!!!! YOU will suffer!!!!

I couldn't believe it when they removed the 100 or so small islands you could hide on, explore, and do your own thing. When I looked at the new map in-game, I nearly coughed my coffee up all over the keyboard.

Actually... its pretty possible to play as a solo player, I do it myself for the last year. Its a matter of politics, with the Territory control patch some regions are way more solo friendly now. And there still exist some nice, hidden/unpopulated places you can live where you will see only another solo players around.

If you look at the map as it is now, every single area is between 2 player cities / towns at the periphery and even more inland. This means that you can easily be attacked from at least 2 directions at any time - and nobody has eyes at the back of their head! In DFUW, creeping up or zerg rushing with loads of people is pretty standard, so if you are discovered, you know you are 95% likely to get killed and fully looted.

Every part of the map is a potential route for hostile players to travel from A to B.

What this means is that solo players are 'road kill' for team gankers or committed griefers. Your chances of 'getting the loot and surviving' are now only about 50-75% per expedition - which is rubbish if you are truly soloing because, as a solo player, every piece of kit is far more precious to you.

In contrast, you used to be able to plan what island you were going to travel to, and plan the safest journey to get there. If you did this, there was a 98% chance of success.

There is an enormous difference between 25-50% chance of getting ganked and looted per expedition, and a 2% chance of getting ganked and looted per expedition.

The map changes totally changed the nature of the game - the removal of the 100 isolated islands on the periphery limits your options as a player massively.

Create the Character YOU want... to do the activity YOU don't want to do!

The character creation system has never been the problem. The problem is that the only 'career' is organised team ganking.

YOU want to explore solo????!!!!! YOU will suffer!!!!

I couldn't believe it when they removed the 100 or so small islands you could hide on, explore, and do your own thing. When I looked at the new map in-game, I nearly coughed my coffee up all over the keyboard.

Is it just me, or does it seem like CCP is feeling threatened by the upcoming Star Citizen? First they're planning a ground shooter and now a dog fighting game, both of which are cogs in the giant Star Citizen machine that stands to make Eves battles for galactic supremacy look like childs play.

I think CCP are worried about both Star Citizen and Elite: Dangerous. However, the threat from Elite: Dangerous is far more imminent.

I'm sure Valkyrie will be good, but the Eve games are gimped because the Eve 'universe' is divided into three: Eve Online, Valkyrie, and DUST. This limits the freedom and diversity each of the three games, e.g. - if you are flying a ship (Valkyrie gameplay), you will never be able to get out of your ship, move around and use a pistol (DUST gameplay).

Check out the keynote speeches.

Why? There is no point in listening to rhetoric when the facts of the matter are that the Eve universe is divided into 3 separate games.

I'm sure Valkyrie will be good, but the Eve games are gimped because the Eve 'universe' is divided into three: Eve Online, Valkyrie, and DUST. This limits the freedom and diversity each of the three games, e.g. - if you are flying a ship (Valkyrie gameplay), you will never be able to get out of your ship, move around and use a pistol (DUST gameplay).

Therefore, Valkyrie has a disadvantage against Elite: Dangerous because Elite: Dangerous aims to eventually be Eve Online, Valkyrie, and DUST rolled into 1.

The release dates of both Valkyrie and Elite: Dangerous are roughly September this year - so it will be interesting to see what happens.

Eve Online is alright if you have loads of time to spend on it, which I don't have. You see, the long-term game in Eve relies on developing relationships with other players - and that takes time on top of actually playing the game itself.

to me it sounds like CCP is very well aware or what the emerging competition is offering (SC and Elite) and have realized that EvE needs to evolve, and quick, for any chance to survive.

i mean, SC alone has already 10 times the "paying supporters" that EvE has on it's best days, and it hasn't even launched yet.

If CCP manages to truly tie in all their 3 games (EvE, Valkyre, Dust), perhaps add walking inside stations, Oculus support, maybe walk inside large ships, i think EvE might actually survive the incoming wave of space mmos. They have by far the best economic model for a space sandbox, not to mention a very loyal fan base. However, the game has become stale after 10 years and it needs major changes.

i'm very happy that CCP is going down this road, and i hope the existing EvE players will embrace these changes. there are no a lot of other options right now. it's try and stay with the competition or risk becoming the UO of space mmos.

CCP have no intention to tie in Eve, Valkyrie, and DUST. If they had, all 3 would be in the same game.

However, CCP will get a lot of money if they give a convincing enough impression that this is what they hope to do.

It's propaganda. There is a huge amount at stake because CCP have made lots of really big mistakes. And now they should have some serious competition.

There is a big difference between releasing 6-monthly expansions compared to releasing an update schedule.

For example, an expansion is something like Mists of Pandaria - it implies significance and it's worthy of professional 3rd party review. An update is like a minor patch.

In other words, it's a way for CCP to make less content and evade critical review.

I have to agree with the guy above. You do not have a clue. Expansions in EvE were never comparable to "expansions" in WoW or its clones where they are just a way to generate hype and charge additionally.

EvEs two annual updates were always free of charge and were not even needed to create additional hype.

Nice for you that you like Elite:Dangerous, but it is in no way comparable to EvE, let alone to a possible combination with the upcoming titles.

The core features of EvE, completely player driven economy, transport, logistics, RTS and empire building are just not there in E:D. And the main selling points like "realistic galaxy with 100 bn stars" are just ridiculous when you think about it. 100bn procedurally generated star systems don't make a game but just a silly big number.

I will very probably play E:D for fun, but not as a replacement for EvE.

You're happy to pay over $130 per year subscription for no significant updates?

CCP are developing 3 separate games: Eve Online, Valkyrie, and DUST. However, the video implies they are integrated into same game. This is an impossibility and CCP have no plans to even attempt this. They are 3 entirely separate games.

Even worse - CCP will stop the 6-monthly expansions. So look forward to seeing even less evolution than ever before.

The last significant evolution was the introduction of wormhole space and T3 ships - that happened way back in 2008.

I believe that all 3 Eve games will be superseded by Elite: Dangerous, which is rather poetic when you consider that Eve is a re-imagining of the original 1984 Elite game.

This guy doesn't even know what he is talking about! just saying that they only develops 3 games (Project Legion is the fourth) and that they stopped expansions without mentioning that they are just changing they update schedule means a lot... Also I don't see why they can't implement Project Legion into Eve Online?

There is a big difference between releasing 6-monthly expansions compared to releasing an update schedule.

For example, an expansion is something like Mists of Pandaria - it implies significance and it's worthy of professional 3rd party review. An update is like a minor patch.

In other words, it's a way for CCP to make less content and evade critical review.

CCP are developing 3 separate games: Eve Online, Valkyrie, and DUST. However, the video implies they are integrated into same game. This is an impossibility and CCP have no plans to even attempt this. They are 3 entirely separate games.

Even worse - CCP will stop the 6-monthly expansions. So look forward to seeing even less evolution than ever before.

The last significant evolution was the introduction of wormhole space and T3 ships - that happened way back in 2008.

I believe that all 3 Eve games will be superseded by Elite: Dangerous, which is rather poetic when you consider that Eve is a re-imagining of the original 1984 Elite game.

This might not be a good sign. Outstanding leadership is all about already having the vision that you know will inspire others and having the determination (and possibly charisma) to make it happen. You enthuse people with your vision and take them with you - adjusting here or there according to some degree of opinion.

Very few people have that skill of leadership.

The feeling I'm getting here is one of 'decision making by general agreement'. It's like voting on what the contents of a pizza should be - if you do it by asking everyone and getting a consensus, you end up with a cheese pizza.

I've been playing games since Zelda on NES. I played a lot of Madden Football, Sim City, all kinds. Fantasy games are my favorite. I don't really have a favorite game but I enjoyed WoW the most out of all the types/genres.

I think the next game to wait for will be Elite: Dangerous - it might not be fantasy, but it will have the same beautiful shrug of self-acceptance, freedom, and liberty that the original WoW felt like.

This discussion is interesting but it's a moot point, like most discussions about Eve - The central, insurmountable, problem with Eve is that it's becoming obsolete.

Why bother with 3 separate games (Eve Online, DUST, Valkyrie) when you will be able play a game that aims to do all 3 facets in the same game (such as Elite: Dangerous and Star Citizen)?

Eve becoming obsolete isn't a question of 'if' - it's a question of whether it will happen in 2015 or 2016.

Eve is nothing if its not a game that evolves over time, but i think your misreading the situation, and while Dust may be a lost cause, and Valkyrie an unknown factor, games like Elite; Dangerous and Star Citizen are more than capable of existing side by side with Eve, i don't think its going to be a question of either/or in whether people play them, if anything it just broadens the spectrum of Sci/fi games, which is currently very sparse, with few successes and more than its fair share of failures. I don't see Eve changing in that sense, it will in all probability remain the niche game that has always been, what may happen though, is that the games that people play alongside Eve, are dropped in favour of those games, that i could easily see happening. If their successful enough, it may even have a positive effect on Eve too, though i have to say, the stranglehold fantasy themeparks have on MMO's does need to be loosened. As an Eve player i am really looking forward to both those games, but it won't change whether i play Eve or not

Eve will not be evolving over time - the 6-monthly expansions will not happen from now on.